Freedom of Conscience

[reen12]

Hi, itsjustdave,

quote: itsjustdave

So, in Judaism, the views of a “school” of rabbis can and does become the teachings of Judaism. In Catholicism, the views of the theologians, even a majority of theologians does not become the doctrines of the Catholic Church unless and until they are asserted as such by the authentic magisterium.

Your comparison is apples and oranges since Judaism doesn’t have a single governing authority which can declared it’s teachings universally binding upon all Jews

You won’t get an argument from me, on this one,

Dave. Even though the 13 Principles of Faith - put forth

by Moses Maimonides {“Rambam”} - [who is evidently

held as the greatest Talmudist, in Judaism’s history]-

are held in great esteem, still, the thought does occur:

Why what he says? Why not “principles” drawn from

another ‘school’?

In point of fact, I’ve seen references to the fairly

broad number of things, on which members of

Judaism are free to hold different opinions on.

What I have found, are several references to the

fact that, in Judaism, the 13 Principles of Faith,

are the minimal requirements to be held, by any

practicing member of Orthodox Judaism.

jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/articles_of_faith.html

I thought you might be interested in the following:

There is evidently a group of Jews Karaites], who

claim that they are following the Mosaic Law, as it was

followed, before Rabbinic Judaism began generating various

‘laws’ and ‘regulations’. [Rabbinic Oral Law as *halakha.]

In short, they say, you read the Tanakh, and it should be

abundantly clear, what God expects.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karaite_Judaism

The book I read recently, said - basically - that that

is why Christ took the Scribes and Pharisees to account,

for their “man-made” laws. Hmmmm, I said to myself.

That’s interesting. I believe the title was:The Greek Messiah and

the Hebrew Yeshua.

Best,

reen

PS: I get the impression that the Rambam is to
Judaism, what Aquinas is to Catholicism. * not* the Magisterium. ]

 

[reen12]

quote: itsjustdave

I disagree with this view, which appears to be speculative theology rather than binding universal doctrine. If only St. Thomas consulted with me on the matter, things would’ve been different.

You know what I really think, Dave? If St. Thomas had
not written the Summa, someone else would have…
it’s a natural human need - for a person who values both
the things of the mind and matters of faith - to both
state clearly and synthesize, I think.

And, the fact is, [which is not readily apparent, from
my posts in this thread! ] I empathize with
St. Thomas. [You don’t go after a degree in philosophy
without experiencing joy, in “setting things out, clearly.”]

Maybe that’s why he drives me nuts. I know where he’s
coming from…and it took me 25 years, to understand,
that the message of the good news cannot be subsumed
into intellectual “categories,” without distorting the
gospel in some critical sense.

Is “systemization” needed? Yes, it is. But keep it
out of the initial proclamation of the gospel.
[Oh, I shall cry out with glee, if the current Holy Father
presses that concept.]

quote:itsjustdave

However, it is clear that the author of Baltimore Catechism held to the Thomist theology which many other Catholic theologians held, which asserts that infants who die without sacramental baptism cannot be extra-sacramentally baptized. I disagree with this view, which appears to be speculative theology rather than binding universal doctrine.

Thanks for clearing that up, for me.

Perhaps the word “cannot” - taught to those millions of
kids- rankles - because I picture one of these children-
now an adult- losing a child, before he/she could be
baptized, and suffering agony - thinking that her child
would not see God in the Face, and that she, herself,
would not see this child, in eternity, were she to go
to heaven.
I hope and pray, that when this happened, the priest
who helped that couple through this loss, knew what
the Church actually teaches.

Thanks for the insights, Dave,

Maureen

 

[reen12]

Hello, Breton,

Well, I received an answer, in response to the question:
what happens in the case of a male child who does not
survive the 8 days, until the cirucumcision.
The person who replied, lives in Israel, so the answer
was there, on the website, for me to read this morning.

Basically: if the mizvah was intended, the fact that
it could not be performed is the result of an act of
God, and, that there is no equivalent to “limbo” in
Judaism. So, since the mizvah was intended, it is
accepted as if it were performed.

It’s what I figured, I’m pleased to say.

Best.

reen12

For a description of mitzvot [plural] please see:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitzva

 

[Matt16_18]

reen12:

Perhaps the word “cannot” - taught to those millions of
kids- rankles - because I picture one of these children-
now an adult- losing a child, before he/she could be
baptized, and suffering agony - thinking that her child
would not see God in the Face, and that she, herself,
would not see this child, in eternity, were she to go
to heaven.

That is a good point.

The CCC does not mention the Baltimore Catechism’s speculative theology concerning limbo. I have hope that the Pope’s International Theological Commission studying limbo will reject the idea that children that died without receiving the Sacrament of Baptism are eternally deprived the beatific vision.

If the Baltimore Catechism’s teaching about limbo is what is keeping you away from the Catholic Church, you need not fret about that any longer.

 

[reen12]

Thank you for your kindness, Matt16_18

quote: Matt16_18

That is a good point.

The CCC does not mention the Baltimore Catechism’s speculative theology concerning limbo. I have hope that the Pope’s International Theological Commission studying limbo will reject the idea that children that died without receiving the Sacrament of Baptism are eternally deprived the beatific vision.

If the Baltimore Catechism’s teaching about limbo is what is keeping you away from the Catholic Church, you need not fret about that any longer.

Maureen :tiphat:

 

[reen12]

quote: Matt16_18

If the Baltimore Catechism’s teaching about limbo is what is keeping you away from the Catholic Church, you need not fret about that any longer.

Actually, where I could certainly profit by another’s prayer,
is in handling the idea of an eternal hell.

OK. So I accept Jesus as Messiah and Son of God. Still, I sure could use some prayers, because I tend to wobble on this.
Every time I think of a lake of eternal fire, I have a hard
time seeing how God would allow such a reality.

Best,

reen

 

[otm]

Matt16_18:

I am sorry, but this is Protestant rubbish.

The Catholic Church is the “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church” and she is the church that God founded. In her ALONE is found the fullness of truth. God will not allow His church to teach error in matters of morality and become of tool of Satan that teaches lies. A person that listens to what God teaches will necessarily listen to God’s church, since God speaks to his people through his church.

No matter how inadequately we serve God, God’s church will NEVER teach error on matters of faith and morals. Unless you accept this truth, you cannot be a member of the Catholic Church, since rejection or obstinate doubt about the Catholic Church’s teaching about infallibility brings automatic excommunication from the Catholic Church.

No, it is not Protestant rubish, as the statement referred to did not say anything about the fullness of truth; it only spoke of truth. Even the Catholic church acknowledges that truth can be found elsewhere, just not the fullness of truth.

Further, you may be right about obstinate doubt; but the Church does not excommunicate for legitimate doubt.

 

[Ahimsa]

reen12:

quote: Matt16_18

Actually, where I could certainly profit by another’s prayer,
is in handling the idea of an eternal hell.

OK. So I accept Jesus as Messiah and Son of God. Still, I sure could use some prayers, because I tend to wobble on this.
Every time I think of a lake of eternal fire, I have a hard
time seeing how God would allow such a reality.

Best,

reen

Hi reen,

Personally, I’m beginning to think that the idea of an eternal lake of fire is a Christian koan, like the idea of “the sound of one hand clapping.”

 

[Ahimsa]

otm:

Further, you may be right about obstinate doubt; but the Church does not excommunicate for legitimate doubt.

:bigyikes: What’s this I hear about a difference between doubts? Legitimate doubt vs obstinate doubt? Please say more.:bowdown:

 

[reen12]

quote: Ahimsa

Hi reen,

Personally, I’m beginning to think that the idea of an eternal lake of fire is a Christian koan, like the idea of “the sound of one hand clapping.”

Glory be! That’s the *first *thing I’ve ever read on hell
that makes sense!!! Talk about an answer to prayer,
from my point of view!

Bless your heart, Ahimsa, and thank you,

Maureen

 

[itsjustdave1988]

reen12,

reen12:

You know what I really think, Dave? If St. Thomas had
not written the Summa, someone else would have…
it’s a natural human need - for a person who values both
the things of the mind and matters of faith - to both
state clearly and synthesize, I think.

I’m reading G.K. Chesterton’s St. Thomas Aquinas. When you get a chance, I recommend it. It may just make you fall in love with St. Thomas again.

I believe St. Thomas, like every saint, fulfills the needs of his day and beyond. In St. Thomas’ day, the world was denying that reason was compatible with faith. St. Thomas skillfully corrected that error. St. Thomas is my confirmation name-sake, and I’m absolutely grateful to him for upholding the authority of reason and faith. For a fallen-away-Catholic-skeptic like me, reason was important in my journey back to God.

I’m most impressed with his death-bed prayer, which every theologian should keep in mind when exercising speculative theology…

If in this world there be any knowledge of this sacrament [of Holy Eucharist] stronger than that of faith, I wish now to use it in affirming that I firmly believe and know as certain that Jesus Christ, True God and True Man, Son of God and Son of the Virgin Mary, is in this Sacrament . . . I receive Thee, the price of my redemption, for Whose love I have watched, studied, and laboured. Thee have I preached; Thee have I taught. Never have I said anything against Thee: if anything was not well said, that is to be attributed to my ignorance. Neither do I wish to be obstinate in my opinions, but if I have written anything erroneous concerning this sacrament or other matters, I submit all to the judgment and correction of the Holy Roman Church, in whose obedience I now pass from this life.

reen12:

Basically: if the mizvah was intended, the fact that
it could not be performed is the result of an act of
God, and, that there is no equivalent to “limbo” in
Judaism. So, since the mizvah was intended, it is
accepted as if it were performed.

It’s what I figured, I’m pleased to say.

The above is what St. Bernard taught regarding infants who died without sacramental baptism.

reen12:

Every time I think of a lake of eternal fire, I have a hard
time seeing how God would allow such a reality.

You might consider reading* Dare We Hope “That All Men Be Saved?”* by Hans Urs von Balthasar.

According to Cardinal Avery Dulles’ article, The Population of Hell:
firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0305/articles/dulles.html

…Edith Stein, now Saint Teresa Benedicta of the Cross…defends a position very like Balthasar’s. Since God’s all-merciful love, she says, descends upon everyone, it is probable that this love produces transforming effects in their lives. To the extent that people open themselves to that love, they enter into the realm of redemption. On this ground Stein finds it possible to hope that God’s omnipotent love finds ways of, so to speak, outwitting human resistance. Balthasar says that he agrees with Stein.

I suppose I have such trust in God’s mercy and justice, that I’m not at all afraid that God will somehow horrifically damn even a single soul contrary to the unanimous consent of the Church Triumphant. God certainly doesn’t need their consent, but I’m certain of their consent just the same.

C.S. Lewis describes hell having a door that is locked from the inside. I tend to agree.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Ahimsa:

Hi reen,

Personally, I’m beginning to think that the idea of an eternal lake of fire is a Christian koan, like the idea of “the sound of one hand clapping.”

Reen… be warned…Ahimsa is a Catholic trapped in a Southern Baptist-Universalist-Buddhist’s body. God is rescuing him at this very moment

 

[Ahimsa]

itsjustdave1988:

Reen… be warned…Ahimsa is a Catholic trapped in a Southern Baptist-Universalist-Buddhist’s body. God is rescuing him at this very moment

Uh oh…I’ve been “outed”.

 

[reen12]

quote: itsjustdave

Reen… be warned…Ahimsa is a Catholic trapped in a Southern Baptist-Universalist-Buddhist’s body. God is rescuing him at this very moment

I can’t bee-leeve that God is bringing to bear Dave - and
his encyclopedic knowledge of the faith - and Ahimsa,
with his most impressive knowledge of Buddhism, to “speak”
to a fallen-away Christian, who’s* main* reading in life has
been…psychology!

All I can say is: I muttered for 50 years over the “dumb”
teaching on ‘perfect contrition’ - and along comes Dave, to tell
me that that is* not* what the Church actually teaches…
with* references*!

I wrestled with the “hell” issue for 50 years,
and along comes Ahimsa and “solves” it for me…in
1 sentence. Ahimsa, I thought last night, after I read
your post, "Maybe that’s *why *I read Buddhism for 25
years. Maybe that’s the way God “set me up” to
hear the reality - when it was spoken by you.

Reality, is indeed, more amazing than fiction!

My gratitude and thanks, to you both.

reen

 

[Ahimsa]

reen12:

quote: itsjustdave

I can’t bee-leeve that God is bringing to bear Dave - and
his encyclopedic knowledge of the faith - and Ahimsa,
with his most impressive knowledge of Buddhism, to “speak”
to a fallen-away Christian, who’s* main* reading in life has
been…psychology!

All I can say is: I muttered for 50 years over the “dumb”
teaching on ‘perfect contrition’ - and along comes Dave, to tell
me that that is* not* what the Church actually teaches…
with* references*!

I wrestled with the “hell” issue for 50 years,
and along comes Ahimsa and “solves” it for me…in
1 sentence. Ahimsa, I thought last night, after I read
your post, "Maybe that’s *why *I read Buddhism for 25
years. Maybe that’s the way God “set me up” to
hear the reality - when it was spoken by you.

Reality, is indeed, more amazing than fiction!

My gratitude and thanks, to you both.

reen

Hi reen,

As my Georgia Baptist preacher grandfather would have said, God works in mysterious ways.

You’re welcome.:yup:

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Ahimsa:

Uh oh…I’ve been “outed”.

Oh that’s ok. God is rescuing me too.

And if Fr. von Balthasar’s speculative theology is correct (I just ordered his book), we are perfectly orthodox in having the hope that Jesus will lead all souls to heaven.

ps. You made me look up koan.

 

[otm]

:bigyikes: What’s this I hear about a difference between doubts? Legitimate doubt vs obstinate doubt? Please say more.:bowdown:

The Church says that we must follow our conscience and we must have a correctly formed conscience. the two at times are in tension. It is not sufficient to simply resort to one’s conscience and assume that all is sufficient; one must also resort to the teachings of the Church. If one’s conscience is at odds with Church teaching, one still has the duty to act according to one’s conscience, but coupled with that is the demand for further work on conforming one’s conscience to that of the Church.

In other words, if your conscience is at odds on a church teaching, you are in for a lot of prayer and further work - research, reading, speaking with your confessor, etc. You are not required to suspend all further action, however, but are guided by your consicence.

It is an area that tends to be misunderstood by both ends of the spectrum; one puts a primacy on conscience and operates as if the issue stopped there; the other puts a primacy on the Church’s teaching and treats any other conscience issues as being morally wrong not only objectively but subjectively.

Said another way, the liberals are scandalized that there might be any other authority besides the conscience, and the conservatives are scandalized that the conscience might have priority when faced with an act.

 

[otm]

One of the problems that we face is understanding that God does not damn, horrifically or otherwise, a soul to hell. The individual does.

We have too much Old Testament imaging of a wrathful and vengeful God. God is a merciful God; but he is also a just God; and in justice would not tamper with the free will of an individual.

Perhaps the best analogy is the individual who will “cut off their nose to spite their face” - the individual who takes the attitutde that they have been wronged - wheter in reality or only in their mind - and will not accept an apology, will not forgive. They are adamant in their anger and self righteousness. They turn their back on an offer of mercy. They seem to be found in families, or at least most easily identified there.

That is the emotional equivalent of one who adamantly turns to sin and away from God. There is ample evidence in the Gospels, from what Christ says, that there will be people who chose to be eternally cut off from God, and God in His justice will permit that.

If you have ever had contact with someone steeped in sin you begin to understand that it is not an issue of a vengeful God; it is an issue of an obstinate individual. To abuse Martin Buber, it is all about I and none about Thou.

 

[reen12]

quote: itsjustdave, speaking to Ahimsa

ps. You made me look up koan.

reen

 

[reen12]

quote: otm

Said another way, the liberals are scandalized that there might be any other authority besides the conscience, and the conservatives are scandalized that the conscience might have priority when faced with an act.

Well observed, I think. In any case, I’ve found that the
CC gives…what I see as ‘guidance’ - most worth heeding.

In terms of abortion, I believe that the Church’s unyielding
opposition to same will- centuries hence- be seen as a
shining witness, and will redound to her glory, and to Christ’s.

reen12